Cited by 99Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

An Examination of the Association of Distress Intolerance and Emotion Regulation with Avoidance

Open access
McHugh, R. Kathryn, Reynolds, Elizabeth K., Leyro, Teresa M., Otto, Michael W.·2013·Cognitive Therapy and Research

Abstract

Distress intolerance is an important motivator of maladaptive avoidance-based coping strategies. The selection of such avoidance behaviors is also influenced by one's access to alternative emotion regulatory strategies. However, little research has examined the relative contributions of these vulnerability factors to avoidance. This study examined whether distress intolerance and access to emotion regulation strategies were uniquely (additively or interactively) associated with self-reported avoidance. Two samples-an unselected sample (n = 300) and a clinical sample (n = 100)-comprised of patients seeking treatment for unipolar mood and/or anxiety disorders were administered measures of distress intolerance, emotion regulation, and avoidance. Results of linear regression analyses indicated that distress intolerance and access to emotion regulation strategies were uniquely and additively associated with avoidance. Implications for the prevention and treatment of psychological disorders are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10608-012-9463-6

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McHugh, R. K., Reynolds, E. K., Leyro, T. M., & Otto, M. W.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
McHugh, R. Kathryn
Venue
Cognitive Therapy and Research
Published
2012-05-05
Volume
37
Issue
2
Pages
363-367
ISSN
  • 0147-5916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2819
OpenAlex
W1983987630
Cited by
99
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Therapy and Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32DA007250)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
distress intolerance, emotion regulation, avoidance, unipolar mood disorders, anxiety disorders, vulnerability factors, clinical samples, prevention of psychological disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review